UK ESSAY PLANS Flashcards
(183 cards)
Overview:
MEDIA INFLUENCE ON OUTCOMES OF ELECTIONS AND PUBLIC POLICY
Print media is less influential but social media is a growing influence when hardening attitudes, particularly a sympathetic voter, and is a very good echo chamber for a political party
MEDIA INFLUENCE ON OUTCOMES OF ELECTIONS AND PUBLIC POLICY
MEDIA INFLUENCE ON OUTCOMES OF ELECTIONS AND PUBLIC POLICY
MEDIA INFLUENCE ON OUTCOMES OF ELECTIONS AND PUBLIC POLICY
Para 1: Opinion Polls influence - VERY
1992 - most polls suggest that Labour may win the election - wavering voters sided with Tories out of fear of a Labour administration led by Neil Kinnock
2015- closeness of the polls led to Conservative efforts to warn the public of an SNP - Labour coalition
Policy impact: polls should that immigration policy was important after the 2010 Election - since then Tories have pledged to limit the net migration rate
Theresa May ditched her plans for reform of elderly social care after her poll lead evaporated in 2017 - ‘Dementia Tax’
MEDIA INFLUENCE ON OUTCOMES OF ELECTIONS AND PUBLIC POLICY
Para 1: Voting Polls - NO
Votes can be wrong… not many people cast their ballot on the basis of polls
Opinion polls are often made out of samples - in 2017 most polls predicted a conservative majority even in the days leading up to vote - these polls did not clock the ‘youth-quake’
Lack of policy impact: successive polls show that public are concerned on Labour’s lack of policy on TRIDENT. Concerned about Corbyn’s potential use of nuclear weapons but have not given clarity
Labour 2015 manifesto shifted opinion on public spending - THEY shifted polls
MEDIA INFLUENCE ON OUTCOMES OF ELECTIONS AND PUBLIC POLICY
Para 2 - traditional print media impact - VERY
1979 - Sun headline ‘Crisis, what crisis?’ at the height of the Winter of Discontent - suggested that James Callaghan was out of touch with voters - swung opinion
1997 - the Sun switched support from Tory to Labour - Tony Blair courted Murdoch - 74% of Daily Mail readers voted Tory in 2017 - right wing ideas
Influence on Policy impact - dominance in RW bias - Blair ditching of Euro referendum as he did not want to alienate Murdochs, The Daily Mails campaign for Stephen Lawrence in early 90’s pushed the government into accepting an independent enquiry into the Met ‘institutionally racist’
MEDIA INFLUENCE ON OUTCOMES OF ELECTIONS AND PUBLIC POLICY
Para 2 - traditional print media impact - NO
However… it has been overstated, the neutrality of the BBC has offset bias
Opinion Polls with Callaghan - Labours strongest assent in 1979, ahead of Thatcher’s liability - ‘Crisis, what crisis’ may not have had that much impact - media attacks may not have their intended effect.. 1979 result could be better explained by valance issues - labours inability to handle industrialisation
1997 - reflecting the mood of the time? Tory sleaze, Iran to arms, mad cows disease etc - were The Sun just backing a winner
2017 Headline - the Suns ‘Don’t chuck prison in the Cor-bin’ - Daily mail 15 hate page spread - little effect as Labour had their largest increase in vote share since 1945
The Sun - 1.6 mill in 2017 vs. 3 mill in 2010 - traditional print media is no longer widely read. YouGov in 2017 - 41% did not vote Tory
Policy - Corbyn has given up with courting, almost adopting policies that are (deliberately?) against RW Murdochs - to claim that Labour is anti the establishment
MEDIA INFLUENCE ON OUTCOMES OF ELECTIONS AND PUBLIC POLICY
Para 3 - image of leaders on television - VERY
TV debates - ‘We’re alright’ - Kinnock in 1993 - poor televisual image
2015 - Ed Miliband falling off the stage in live audience
2010 - Nick Clegg ‘Clegg Mania’ resulted in a hung parliament
Theresa May’s refusal to do TV debate - ‘the first rule of leadership is that you show up’
Corbyn’s inability to explain childcare in 2017 election debate - cast doubt
Equal air time
Policy - TV is essential in establishing the Overton window - areas of public discourse that are acceptable
2010 controversy - BBC invited Nick Griffin - far right BMP leader to QT - tough stances on immigration, widened the Overton window
MEDIA INFLUENCE ON OUTCOMES OF ELECTIONS AND PUBLIC POLICY
Para 3 - image of leaders on television - NO
the need for a positive image is overstated
Kinnock’s ‘We’re alright’ happened only a week before the 1992 election - unlikely influence
2010 - after debate, lib dem vote only went up by 1%
2015 Ed Miliband - Jeremy Paxman interview was strong ‘Hell yes’ but still lost
2017 - Theresa saw largest vote share increase since 1992 - economic choice instead.. more rational?
Lack of impact on policy - 2017 manifesto - Labour moved the Overton window back to public ownership all by itself.
MEDIA INFLUENCE ON OUTCOMES OF ELECTIONS AND PUBLIC POLICY
Para 4 - Social Media - NO
too early to determine it’s impact - falsehoods, Miliband’s appearance on Russell Brand’s show did little for young voters - echo chamber of media - it reflects opinion and doesn’t change it
MEDIA INFLUENCE ON OUTCOMES OF ELECTIONS AND PUBLIC POLICY
Para 4 - Social Media - VERY
2017 election - Labour’s use of viral videos gaining 5.4 million views in 2 days #forthemany #grime4corbyn
Ukip - spent 2015 campaign money reaching out to elderly voters - 3.8 mill votes
2019 - Tories have targeted voters in Milton Keynes with anti Corbyn ads on facebook
Explain and analyse three ways in which the media have affected the outcome of UK general elections.
Explain and analyse three ways in which the media have affected the outcome of UK general elections.
Explain and analyse three ways in which the media have affected the outcome of UK general elections.
PARA 1: Growing focus on leaders, leading voters to vote on leadership
2017 election, Theresa May had a bruising interview with Jeremy Paxman which largely contributed to her image of being a wooden, out-of-touch politician, media also largely damaged her image - scandalous youth running through corn fields. Arguably media therefore played a considerable part in a minority government in 2017. Through ensuring that information about party leaders reaches most eyes in the UK, the media plays a considerable role in encouraging people to vote on the basis of party leaders. For example, during the 2019 general election campaign, the media’s display of scandals over Boris Johnson’s islamophobic comments, and Jeremy Corbyn’s terrible interview with Jeremy Paxman, would have undoubtedly impacted a decent proportion of the population. This has become more significant in recent years, ever since the first televised leader debates in 2010.
Explain and analyse three ways in which the media have affected the outcome of UK general elections.
PARA 2: newspaper endorsements
Newspaper leanings - the Guardian is left-wing, while the Telegraph is on the right. One example on influencing public opinion and voting intentions is the Sun switching their support to Tony Blair in 1997, which many claim contributed to his landslide victory in the election of that year, one headline even reading “It was the Sun wot won it”. Another example is the headline “Crisis? What crisis?”, ran in the Sun in response to James Callaghan’s comments about the Winter of Discontent. Although Callaghan did not actually say the sentence, the Sun fashioned his words into the headline, which is regarded as ‘the three words that took down the Labour government in 1979”. Outward partisanship from news publications can therefore affect the voting intentions of their readers in response to their take on a particular candidate or party.
Explain and analyse three ways in which the media have affected the outcome of UK general elections.
PARA 3: media coverage of scandals
tests party loyalties and influence swing voters. In the aftermath of the Iraq War and Blair’s premiership, nickname “Bliar” contributed to Labour losses in the 2005 general election and the overall defeat in 2010. Another example of this is the expenses scandal of 2009, in which The Daily Telegraph published leaked documents over MPs abusing their expenses privileges. This scandal has had a huge influence on British politics to this day, contributing to the overall populist, anti-corruption and anti-‘elites’ rhetoric in today’s politics, as MPs look to regain trust from the electorate after the scandal pushed the view that they were not acting in the interests of the British people. Media coverage and focus on both of these major events have shaped public opinion on politicians as a whole in this country, with only 14% of the public saying they trust politicians in the latest (2019?) Ipsos-Mori poll.
EVALUATE THE VIEW THAT THE SUPREME COURT HAS BECOME TOO POWERFUL
EVALUATE THE VIEW THAT THE SUPREME COURT HAS BECOME TOO POWERFUL
Intro:
EVALUATE THE VIEW THAT THE SUPREME COURT HAS BECOME TOO POWERFUL
YES: rise in applications for judicial review has held up the work of democratically elected representatives. Furthermore, the judiciary’s role to allow ECJ, the ECHR to challenge parliamentary sovereignty and recent constitutional reforms all add weight to why they are too powerful. However judicial review protects the rule of law, essential in a liberal democracy. The uk judiciary lacks power vs. a judiciary with a codified constitutions, they also demonstrate judicial restraint
EVALUATE THE VIEW THAT THE SUPREME COURT HAS BECOME TOO POWERFUL
PARA 1: YES - judicial review
far too much power over public policy and influence over elected officials
ultra vires - 2017 - SC ruled that parliament must vote on whether Article 50 should begin - May could not begin talks
Sajid Javid - ‘clear attempt to frustrate the will of the British public who wanted to leave’
Boris Johnson and Lord chancellor Robert Buckland QC have set up a panel of experts tasked with examining the need “for potential reforms to judicial review”.
unelected judges vs. elected politicians
R(Miller) v the Prime Minister 2019 limited royal prerogative power to prorogue Parliament of the UK - restated parliamentary sovereignty
Oct 2013 - Court of Appeal ruled that Jeremy Hunt did not have the power to implement cuts at Lewisham Hospital
Increased 3x fold - judicial reviews were 4000 in 2000 vs. 15,000 in 2013
EVALUATE THE VIEW THAT THE SUPREME COURT HAS BECOME TOO POWERFUL
PARA 2: YES - judicial independence
the creation of the Supreme Court has made conflict more likely and has strengthened the autonomy of the court.
Created in 2009 - establishing the seperation of powers, Judicial Appointments Commission and limited role of Lord Chancellors
Likely to be more active attacking members of parliament - Boris Johnsons suspension of parliament for political reasons in Sept 2019
A lot of reform to neutralise the court… diff to War Lords - defend their actions - Law Reed ‘judges aren’t staging a power grab’ after the SC landmark Brexit defeats
EVALUATE THE VIEW THAT THE SUPREME COURT HAS BECOME TOO POWERFUL
YES - the HRA holds too much power
HRA makes it unlawful for any public body to act in an unconventional way against the EC in on human rights - Judges can undermine rulings
Gilian vs. Quentin case (2010) at EC found unwarranted police search - are they stepping into public policy? Hindering crime fighting?
HJ (Iran) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (2010) - homosexuality - HRA prevents immigrants from being deported to places of discrimination
Where laws were ambiguous, court now able to interpret them, and force parliament to act through declaration of incompatibility - Ruling on the merits of law, rather than the application of it
Because ECHR vaguely written, liberal judges have taken an increasingly broad view of rights that are protected e.g. become more ‘activist’. e.g. creating right to privacy where none existed in UK law - allowing super-injunctions. This has undermined Parliament’s attempts to set minimum sentences for certain crimes.
EVALUATE THE VIEW THAT THE SUPREME COURT HAS BECOME TOO POWERFUL
PARA 4: NO - judicial review is undermined by sovereignty
SC exists!!! that’s why JR has increased, no longer in parliament so therefore has more independence
The courts are assuring that the government isn’t too powerful
Unlawful laws can be changed and altered as parliament is sovereign
2010 freezing of assets of suspected terrorists - SC ruled that it obstructed the rules parliament had given to government - went against HRA, put it through parliament - only bc it was a UN requirement
When a judge rules minister has acted ultra vires, they are only upholding the will of Parliament, which set out the law in the first place. Ensuring public officials only act within the powers that parliament has granted.
‘Black Spider’ memos (2015) Journalist Rob Evans wished to see letters and memos (nicknamed ‘Black Spider’ because of the distinctive handwriting) sent by Prince Charles to government ministers. The government did not want to release the letters, arguing the contents were private and sensitive.
EVALUATE THE VIEW THAT THE SUPREME COURT HAS BECOME TOO POWERFUL
NO - lack of constitution
- upholding parliamentary soverignty unlike US Supreme Court who can strike down Congress because of the Constitution
We don’t have a codified document - Shelby vs. Holder - voting rights Act - shows the US power
Abortion - ‘heartbeat bill’
· Constitution still predominantly consists of statute law, passed by elected representatives in Parliament.
· SC can declare incompatibility with Human Rights Act, but this does not necessarily lead to government changing the law, see. 2004 Hirst case about voting rights for prisoners.
Also government can change the law retrospectively meaning that no offense of ultra vires has taken place ,see Reilly v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions 2016,
EVALUATE THE VIEW THAT THE SUPREME COURT HAS BECOME TOO POWERFUL
NO - judges haven’t always been able to stop government from eroding the rights of people
limits to their power - incompatibility statements are not binding on their power - parliamentary sovereignty is actually upheld by the HRA - SC can’t automatically strike down on previous legislation
Announcing a declaration of incompatibility BUT government can denounce this declaration - Bellmarch case, they just amended the HRA
2015 - EC of HR - prison voting - in the UK, this has not changed, failed to legislate
Government are calling the shots - 2013 - secret courts within the justice system for terrorists doesn’t have to be disclosed
· 2014 R (Nicklinson) v Ministry of Justice, SC asked to determine whether Suicide Act 1961, which forbid assisted suicide, was incompatible with art 8 HRA. Judges ruled it was not for them to decide, but instead a decision of elected representatives.
Conclusion
judges not currently too poweful, not the same as the US, recently SC brought into lime light because of vagueries of constitution, trauma of Brexit, devolution but in reality, politicians get their own way in the end. If judges seem more powerful it is only because power of state has increased, and therefore requires firmer hand from judiciary.
EVALUATE THE VIEW THAT PARLIAMENT HAS BECOME INCREASINGLY EFFECTIVE IN SCRUTINISING THE EXECUTIVE
EVALUATE THE VIEW THAT PARLIAMENT HAS BECOME INCREASINGLY EFFECTIVE IN SCRUTINISING THE EXECUTIVE